Ww1

[Wodin]

Im loving CMSF and the Marine module so far. The best tactical game made so far. Infantry combat is a dream to play and watch. Anyway after playing the Trench scenario and my extensive knowledge of WW1 I really do believe this engine would make a cracking WW1 game. The Somme, all three Ypres battles, verdun...the list goes on. The game engine is perfect to recreate them battles as well as trench raids etc.

[Cuirassier]

Not sure how interesting a tactical ww1 sim would be...

[JonS]

Not sure how interesting a tactical ww1 sim would be...

Potentially: very.

The problem is that the tactical problem faced in, say, 1916-1918 is very complex (in many ways much more complex than in WWII or now), and simulating it in any useful and entertaining way would be very tricky.

[Guest]

Not sure how interesting a tactical ww1 sim would be...

Or you could do ancillary theaters. Some fascinating battles in Eastern Europe. Also, Gallipoli, if properly handled, could be a great campaign.

Speaking of Eastern Europe, read Erwin Rommel's "Attacks" (or "Infantry Attacks") for some of the most tactically stimulating and illuminating writing about World War I. Pretty easy to find, at least here in the US. Tougher to find, as I understand it, in Germany / Austria.

[Michael Emrys]

Or you could do ancillary theaters. Some fascinating battles in Eastern Europe. Also, Gallipoli, if properly handled, could be a great campaign.

I think my own favorite would be the campaign in Palestine.

Michael

[Sivodsi]

Im loving CMSF and the Marine module so far. The best tactical game made so far. Infantry combat is a dream to play and watch. Anyway after playing the Trench scenario and my extensive knowledge of WW1 I really do believe this engine would make a cracking WW1 game. The Somme, all three Ypres battles, verdun...the list goes on. The game engine is perfect to recreate them battles as well as trench raids etc.

For you, Wodin, I recommend the Iwo Jima scenario. Its the closest I've come to a WW1 encounter in a PBEM.

[MikeyD]

CMSF engine might be able to handle the early months of WWI when the lines were still fluid (no horses though). But late-war - Whew! You line up your battalion and send them over the top. If the enemy runs himself out of ammo before killing y'all then the survivors might make it to the far trench.

Well, you could have T. E. Lawrence blowing up railway lines in Syria I suppose.

[Paper Tiger]

When you think about it, there really wouldn't be very much required to get a WW1 western front game up and running after the changes made to the game engine to make Normandy have been made. Personally, I would love to have a WW1 'Guns of August' Western Front game. It wasn't all artillery for 2-3 days, detonate your mines and then...charge... lose the mission...

[JonS]

CMSF engine might be able to handle the early months of WWI when the lines were still fluid (no horses though). But late-war - Whew! You line up your battalion and send them over the top. If the enemy runs himself out of ammo before killing y'all then the survivors might make it to the far trench.

That's a horribly inaccurate picture of late-war-WWI. It *might* be true of late 1914 thru early 1917 (in parts, except the exceptions, etc) but it bears practically no resemblance to mid-1917 through to the end of the war (except for the later German attacks in April-June 1918, and the US attacks thereafter).

[Cpl Steiner]

I personally don't think WWI is worth doing. I've played the odd board wargame set in WWI and didn't much enjoy it. The subject matter is in many ways distasteful (gas, human wave assaults against MGs, etc) and the war is regarded by many, if not most, as a pointless waste of life. Lions led by donkeys, as was said in the UK.

If you want to do a pre-WWII title you'd be better off going back even before WWI, to something like the "Boy's Own" adventures period of colonial warfare (Brits in Africa, US Marines in the "Boxer" rebellion in China, etc).

[Guest]

Or something really off-mainstream, like the Russian Civil War + the "intervention". Problem with US post-Civil War is that they generally invaded random tiny countries and then shot the sh*t out of them. Big stick, indeed. They weren't even particularly "colonial" about it, in terms of extending "American rule". Probably better that way, but I'm sure the tens of thousands of Filipinos killed during the Philippine Insurrection would like as not disagree.

Honestly I think WWI is severely mischaracterized, largely due to the popular works associated with it. Remarque, the Fighting Father... it all stresses the trench warfare to exclusion. Like I said, if you haven't, read Rommel.

[Webwing]

WWI, in games has always been overshadowed by WW2 and has never been done in a satisfactory way. No company has given it the attention it deserves. I understand the argument that the leadership was below average and that it was a waste of lives but you could say the same about any conflict to some extend. It depends mostly from what perspective you are looking at it.

Personally I think it would be very interesting to do it with the CM2 engine. And apart from the historical engagements there is a fantastic amount of what if scenarios that could be created with the editor.

The combination of weapons and primitive tanks and vehicles of that period would make for very interesting tactical challenges.

[c3k]

I agree with Webwing. It's a strong testament to the faith I have in the CMx2 engine that I think it could simulate a WWI action and make it interesting. I've never been much of a fan of WWI games, but using CMx2 could make for some tough tactical situations. Imagine a night-time trench raid to get prisoners with flares, pockets of gas in the bottom of shellholes, hand to hand fighting, etc.

Ken

[Cpl Steiner]

Would it be possible to do a realistic WWI game though, given that modern infantry tactics were equally possible then as now but just weren't used because they hadn't been invented yet. Our modern infantry tactics grew out of experimentation during that war and were then perfected in WWII. We would all benefit from the hindsight of knowing that advancing at a walk towards enemy MGs is suicide - something that the generals then didn't appreciate.

[Guest]

Some halfway decent infantry tactics had been invented (and certainly, lessons learned), they were just largely ignored. I don't think that replaying a war with the benefit of hindsight is really an issue at all except at a strategic level. The technology, level of training, and "problems" are the same. How do you cross a stretch of broken ground to clear an enemy trench?

Also, I'm fairly certain from my reading (Guderian's "Achtung Panzer" and some other sources) that commanders were pretty constantly trying to innovate, but the overall strategic situation and lack of mobility for all armies involved really created the nastiness on the Western front. Well, that and some of the innovations were not all that bright (creeping barrage that takes thirty minutes to move forward while the "covered" troops are being shot to hell, anyone?).

[Pandur]

wow, i never thought someone else would like this. i suggested this at some point quiet a long time ago.

CM : Trench Rats, that would be it!!! id buy it to 100% and all its modules...twice or more times if needed

BFC, go for it *cheer*

[JonS]

... some of the innovations were not all that bright (creeping barrage that takes thirty minutes to move forward while the "covered" troops are being shot to hell, anyone?).

ur doin it rong.

Late WWI fireplans (say, Messines 1917 onwards) were masterpieces of orchestration and Effects Based operations. If a creeper was the sole extent of your fire support, then your artillery commander deserved to be given a jolly good thumping. A typical fireplan would include extensive - and effective - CB work, smoke for screening and blinding, concentrations on particular targets, a/c for recce and ground attack, and a creeper up to 500yds deep sweeping the ground ahead to keep the enemies heads down until the friendly infantry arrived at the position.

[Guest]

Hmm. I could be recalling my source incorrectly (I believe it was "Achtung Panzer!"), but one of the limiting factors in an early British use of tanks was a painfully slow creeping barrage. Cambrai, was it? Maybe not. At any rate, whichever battle it was, supporting infantry were shot to hell while the creeping barrage limited their advance and they didn't have the planned support of the tanks.

Also, catching on about creeping barrages nearly three full years after the start of the war does not remove the onus from them, to my mind. That's like saying "we decided to start training our helicopter pilots and wow look at our lowered casualty rates!" in I-II-III Corps in 1968.

[Pandur]

but one of the limiting factors in an early British use of tanks was a painfully slow creeping barrage

iam no "pro" in this things, i just read up a little about gas warefare. i have a rather decent book about it.

however could it be that the limiting factors could have simply been that the creeping barage was as slow as allways, but the tanks brought such a kind of speed and penetration factor to the battlefield that the creeping barrage was too slow for the now combined advance of tanks and infantry.

from that point of view i could understand why own inftantry was shot up in the creeping barrage, first, they couldnt simply stop, there was no stoping for long in no mans land generaly. and second, possibly they didnt knew it was their own fire at the time. there was possibly so much noise, shock and awe, there is no way to figure what is going on from the squad leader perspective in mid of nomans land. his goal was to get to the eny trenches and keep up with the tanks, and they did it seems in youre exaple.

so, i think creeping barrages where usefull and doable enough for the parties to keep doing em. simply as a new element of warfare was introduced, the tank, they had to adopt, but some accidents happened.

[Scipio]

I would also like to see a CM WWI game. The trench warfare on the western front between late 1914 and 1917 were not everything. I could imagine that the late western front is more interesting, with tanks and Sturmkompanien etc.

From a bussiness point of view it's the only sensefull theatre for the main module, anyway. A game that doesn't offer US troops will sell only half as much in the US, and the US is still the biggest market for war games. This isn't meant ironic, it's just something that Steve once said, IIRC.

Beside that, users can create most other (Western) battles with the troops of the late war, too, since the Infantry itself hasn't changed to much. You just need to keep out tanks and a few other late war gimmicks. That's maybe not 100% accurate, but I would say still more than enough.

[MarkEzra]

Just to add some balance.... WW1 game? Isn't that some form of Grog dementia?

Now if we EVER get the chance to use desert Matilda's and Tunisian M3 Lee's in CMx2 I'd be personally very happy.

[theFightingSeabee]

1. Make a trenched out map in mud.

2. Add a whole bunch of craters, bunkers, etc.

3. Make all the infantry as a bunch of sniper squads (single shot) and a few mg's.

4. Give both sides lots of artillery.

5. Make ww1 skins for both sides.

6. Have at it!

[Scipio]

1. Make a trenched out map in mud.

2. Add a whole bunch of craters, bunkers, etc.

3. Make all the infantry as a bunch of sniper squads (single shot) and a few mg's.

4. Give both sides lots of artillery.

5. Make ww1 skins for both sides.

6. Have at it!

It's not that easy. We don't have barbed wire, what's an important obstacle for infantry. Indeed was the whole artillery concept much different from today, both with a lot more smaller artillery like 75mm guns as well as a number of very big guns. Artillery delay were MUCH bigger in WWI; you likely won't have any artillery except fireplans and maybe onmap mortars (because ->) The WWI C&C concept was completly different, partely because radios and field telephone were rare and unreliable - communications were often done by dispatch runners, messenger pigeons etc. Another point is that CMx2 trenches and bunkers are no replacement for WWI fortifications, you can't especially not simulate fortified areas like Verdun or Liège, just to name two. The landscape you describe was also only one part of the West Front, especially in Flanders. Chemical warfare ain't simulated as well as flamethrowers. Again about artilley and fortifications, the battle of Somme was an example that the effect of artillery against the German trenchlines was overestimated. While the Germans of cause took heavy casualties, they were still able to hold positions.

Well, that's just a few differences...

[c3k]

Absolutely, re: chemical warfare.

Volumetric smoke could be, er, improved in CMx2. A little more "volumee". I'd like to see gaseous behavior which portrays the physical characteristics of real gasses. Tight, dense, columnar WP. Initially dense, black, petrochemical fueled smoke which disperses as it rises, but stops rising as it cools. Fog which creeps along the low ground. Chlorine, phosgene, and mustard gasses which have the appropriate color. (The otherworldly green of a slowly drifting bank of gas would be a bowel loosening experience.) The ability to have gas pockets in low ground, such as shellholes and trenches, etc.

I foresee a new game: Combat Mission: Gas Generator.

Regards,

Ken

[Pandur]

well most of the agents used where colourless. i consider this a tricky parts if done in a game...do they give it distinctive coloures, like vehicles smoke now in the game? maybe only a spreading coloured zone on the ground indicateing gas(visually like a cover arc, different colours for different agents)?

the latter would make it much more simple to do things like gas pockets and gas free "islands", in a rolling gas cloud.

the current CMx2 wind system would need to be changed quiet a bit for the first. we need settings for scenarios like steadieness of wind, the strenghs and the long term direction and its chance to change once in a while(and blow back some gas into the own trenches once in a while).

when i think about it, chemical warefare could be a "module" itself. there is quiet a lot to do to justify it.